A Logic Meta-Programming Foundation for Example-Driven Pattern Detection in Object-Oriented Programs

Abstract—This paper summarizes the doctoral dissertation in which we introduced an example-driven approach to pattern detection. This approach enables specifying pattern characteristics in a familiar language: through a code excerpt that corresponds to their prototypical implementation. Such excerpts are matched against the program under investigation according to various matching strategies that vary in leniency. Each match is quantified by the extent to which it exhibits the exemplified characteristics. The smaller this extent, the more likely the match is a false positive —thus establishing a ranking which facilitates assessing a large amount of matches. Unique to the matching process is that it incorporates whole-program analyses in its comparison of individual program elements. This way, we are able to recall implicit implementation variants (i.e., those implied by the semantics of the programming language) of a pattern of which only the prototypical implementation has been exemplified. I

A Logic Meta Programming Foundation for Example-Driven Pattern Detection in Object-Oriented Programs

The growing number of tools for detecting user-specified software patterns is testament to their valuable applications throughout the development process. In these applications, user-specified software patterns describe code that exhibits characteristics of interest. For instance, violations of the protocol an API expects to be adhered to. Logic formulas can be used as expressive and descriptive pattern specifications. This merely requires reifying the program under investigation such that variables can range over its elements. Executing a proof procedure will establish whether program elements exhibit the characteristics specified in a formula. However, we have observed that such formulas become convoluted and operational in nature when developers attempt to ensure all instances of a pattern are recalled. As the behavioral characteristics of a pattern can be implemented in different ways, the corresponding formula either has to enumerate each implementation variant or describe the machine-verifiable behavior shared by these variants. The former formulas are relatively descriptive, but only recall the implementation variants that are enumerated. The latter formulas recall all implementations of the specified behavior